Vecta Contract, Inc. v. Lynch

• Decision Date: 25 January 1984
• Docket Number: No. 82-2615,82-2615
• Citation: 444 So.2d 1093
• Parties: VECTA CONTRACT, INC., Appellant, v. John T. LYNCH and Jean T. Lynch, his wife, Appellees.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 1093

444 So.2d 1093

VECTA CONTRACT, INC., Appellant, v. John T. LYNCH and Jean T. Lynch, his wife, Appellees.

No. 82-2615.

District Court of Appeal of Florida,

Fourth District.

Jan. 25, 1984.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 29, 1984.

Joseph S. Kashi of Conrad, Scherer & James, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Larry Klein and Ricci & Roberts, West Palm Beach, for appellees.

HERSEY, Judge.

John T. Lynch obtained a jury verdict in the amount of $80,000 as compensation for personal injuries occasioned by the collapse of a defectively designed chair allegedly manufactured by Vecta Contract, Inc. Twenty thousand dollars was awarded to his spouse, Jean T. Lynch, for derivative losses. Vecta appeals the final judgment entered thereon suggesting that there was insufficient evidence to go to the jury on the question of whether Vecta manufactured the defective chair. In a products liability case it is necessary to present evidence that the defendant manufactured or produced the product that caused the injury. Morton v. Abbott Laboratories, 538 F.Supp. 593 (M.D.Fla.1982). The issue on appeal here is the sufficiency of the evidence adduced to satisfy this requirement.

"Sufficiency is a test of adequacy. Sufficient evidence is 'such evidence, in character, weight, or amount, as will legally justify the judicial or official action demanded.' " Tibbs v. State, 397 So.2d 1120, 1123 (Fla.1981), aff'd, 457 U.S. 31, 102 S.Ct. 2211, 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982). It is not the function of the trial judge or the appellate court to (re)weigh evidence. Id. The jury should decide the issues where there is the possibility of different conclusions or inferences from the evidence. Ranger v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., 336 So.2d 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Only when there is no evidence or reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence to support the nonmoving parties' position should a trial court direct a verdict. Marcano v. Puhalovich, 362 So.2d 439 (Fla. 4th DCA), appeal dismissed, 365 So.2d 714 (Fla.1978). The appellate tribunal's concern is "whether, after all conflicts in the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom have been resolved in favor of the verdict on appeal, there is substantial, competent evidence to support the verdict and judgment." Tibbs, 397 So.2d at 1123.

The record reveals that chairs of the genre that collapsed under plaintiff were originally manufactured by a company named Burke, Inc. That company, together with the right to manufacture the chairs, was acquired by Vecta. It was thus incumbent on plaintiff to show that the particular chair was manufactured by Vecta rather than by Burke. This was accomplished by attempting to show (1) the approximate date on which Vecta acquired the manufacturing rights and (2) that the chair was manufactured subsequent to that date.

In order to prove the date on which acquisition occurred plaintiff introduced the testimony of a manufacturer's representative who had dealt with the Burke and Vecta chairs. On direct examination this witness, Eugene Lisa, testified that Vecta acquired Burke "in the late sixties." On cross-examination the witness was asked whether he had personal knowledge as to the date of acquisition. His response was:

It would have to have been prior to 1973 because at that time I did work in an office furniture dealership and we did have a Vecta catalog as opposed to a Burke catalog. From what I remember of the history given on the company, the late sixties appears to be a time frame when the transition occurred.

The second element of proof, the date of manufacture of the chair, was attempted to be established by the testimony of David Jenkins, an engineer on the faculty of a university. His pertinent testimony, responding to cross-examination, was as follows:

Q Do you have any idea, Doctor, any opinion as to the age of this chair?

A No, sir, I do not....